MCOC: Is it now forbidden to have multiple accounts in the game?
Estevao
Member Posts: 28 ★
I ask this question out of the deepest disgust. At the end of the last season of alliance wars, my account was banned for a month and my alliance was downgraded in the final ranking. Only my account was banned, of course.
I created a support ticket and exposed all the necessary information in my case, waiting for an explanation.
The tech support response was that my account was suspended for violating the rules against account sharing. Unbelievably, only my account was suspended, not the account or accounts of whoever or whoever allegedly committed the sharing.
However, that was not so. I explained, without success, that I have two accounts in the same alliance, which I only use. In fact, a simple verification of the IP records should be enough to verify that the two accounts were always used on the same two or three IP addresses and always on the same mobile phone (unique MAC address).
Even despite providing this technical data for the team to verify the information, the responsible team refused to transmit and analyze such exculpatory information.
I am frustrated because this has meant a loss to my fellow members of the alliance, but I am also very concerned because it is a 30-day suspension motivated by a misinterpretation of the situation, in which the injured party is not given any opportunity to counter the decision. This creates a situation of defenselessness and great discomfort, as it means that honest players, who comply with the TOS, can also be punished.
If it is now forbidden to have more than one account in the game or two accounts in the same alliance, this must be said clearly. And if it's allowed, at the very least it should be allowed to appeal a decision so drastic that it could end up with a user without their account, after years of honest gaming. Do not you think?
Below I translate (through Google) the message received by Kabam's technical support, to which I thank both the speed in the response and the exhaustive response. I know they just comply with the established protocol, but that should be changed (according to the information I indicated).
[removed by Moderator]
I created a support ticket and exposed all the necessary information in my case, waiting for an explanation.
The tech support response was that my account was suspended for violating the rules against account sharing. Unbelievably, only my account was suspended, not the account or accounts of whoever or whoever allegedly committed the sharing.
However, that was not so. I explained, without success, that I have two accounts in the same alliance, which I only use. In fact, a simple verification of the IP records should be enough to verify that the two accounts were always used on the same two or three IP addresses and always on the same mobile phone (unique MAC address).
Even despite providing this technical data for the team to verify the information, the responsible team refused to transmit and analyze such exculpatory information.
I am frustrated because this has meant a loss to my fellow members of the alliance, but I am also very concerned because it is a 30-day suspension motivated by a misinterpretation of the situation, in which the injured party is not given any opportunity to counter the decision. This creates a situation of defenselessness and great discomfort, as it means that honest players, who comply with the TOS, can also be punished.
If it is now forbidden to have more than one account in the game or two accounts in the same alliance, this must be said clearly. And if it's allowed, at the very least it should be allowed to appeal a decision so drastic that it could end up with a user without their account, after years of honest gaming. Do not you think?
Below I translate (through Google) the message received by Kabam's technical support, to which I thank both the speed in the response and the exhaustive response. I know they just comply with the established protocol, but that should be changed (according to the information I indicated).
[removed by Moderator]
Post edited by Kabam Porthos on
5
This discussion has been closed.
Comments